VulnerabilityPublished 26 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-10137: Snow Monkey (WordPress theme) · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects Snow Monkey (WordPress theme)Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:42 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
inc2734 Snow Monkey	Affected =29.1.5	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-10137 effectively, organizations should take several specific actions beyond generic advice. First, immediately assess whether the Snow Monkey theme version 29.1.5 or earlier is in use and plan for an upgrade once a patch is released. In the absence of an official patch, consider temporarily disabling or replacing the theme to eliminate the attack surface. Implement strict egress filtering on the web server to restrict outbound HTTP/HTTPS requests to only trusted destinations, preventing SSRF exploitation from reaching internal services. Review and harden the configuration of internal services to require strong authentication and limit access from the web server. Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious request patterns targeting the request() function or unusual internal network access attempts. Conduct thorough input validation and sanitization on any user-controllable parameters that might influence the request() function, ensuring that attackers cannot inject arbitrary URLs. Monitor logs and network traffic for anomalies indicative of SSRF attempts, such as unexpected internal IP address requests originating from the web server. Finally, educate development and operations teams about SSRF risks and secure coding practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities in the future.

Description

The Snow Monkey theme for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 29.1.5 via the request() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services.

Impact

The SSRF vulnerability in the Snow Monkey theme can have several impacts on affected organizations. Attackers can exploit it to send unauthorized requests from the vulnerable server to internal services, potentially bypassing firewalls and network segmentation. This can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive internal APIs, databases, or administrative interfaces, resulting in data leakage or unauthorized data modification. The integrity of internal systems may be compromised if attackers manipulate internal services via these forged requests. While availability is not directly impacted, the breach of confidentiality and integrity can facilitate further attacks such as privilege escalation, lateral movement, or data exfiltration. Organizations with critical internal services exposed to the vulnerable WordPress installation are at increased risk. The medium CVSS score reflects that while exploitation is not trivial, the consequences of a successful attack can be significant, especially in environments where internal services hold sensitive or critical data. The absence of authentication and user interaction requirements lowers the barrier for attackers to attempt exploitation remotely. Overall, this vulnerability can undermine trust in the affected web applications and expose organizations to regulatory and reputational damage if exploited.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 18:09 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats